All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: FIO performance regression in 4.11 kernel vs. 4.10 kernel observed on ARM64
Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 12:07:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170508110754.GI8526@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50f528e8-8d8d-b168-784d-607a602ba808@broadcom.com>

Hi Scott,

Thanks for the report.

On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 06:37:55PM -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
> I have updated the kernel to 4.11 and see significant performance
> drops using fio-2.9.
> 
> Using FIO the performanced drops from 281 KIOPS to 207 KIOPS using
> single core and task.
> Percent performance drop becomes even worse if multi-cores and multi-
> threads are used.
> 
> Platform is ARM64 based A72.  Can somebody reproduce the results or
> know what may have changed to make such a dramatic change?
> 
> FIO command and resulting log output below using null_blk to remove
> as many hardware specific driver dependencies as possible.
> 
> modprobe null_blk queue_mode=2 irqmode=0 completion_nsec=0
> submit_queues=1 bs=4096
> 
> taskset 0x1 fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --numjobs=1
> --gtod_reduce=1 --name=readtest --filename=/dev/nullb0 --bs=4k
> --iodepth=128 --time_based --runtime=15 --readwrite=read

I can confirm that I also see a ~20% drop in results from 4.10 to 4.11 on
my AMD Seattle board w/ defconfig, but I can't see anything obvious in the
log.

Things you could try:

  1. Try disabling CONFIG_NUMA in the 4.11 kernel (this was enabled in
     defconfig between the releases).

  2. Try to reproduce on an x86 box

  3. Have a go at bisecting the issue, so we can revert the offender if
     necessary.

Cheers,

Will

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Subject: Re: FIO performance regression in 4.11 kernel vs. 4.10 kernel observed on ARM64
Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 12:07:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170508110754.GI8526@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50f528e8-8d8d-b168-784d-607a602ba808@broadcom.com>

Hi Scott,

Thanks for the report.

On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 06:37:55PM -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
> I have updated the kernel to 4.11 and see significant performance
> drops using fio-2.9.
> 
> Using FIO the performanced drops from 281 KIOPS to 207 KIOPS using
> single core and task.
> Percent performance drop becomes even worse if multi-cores and multi-
> threads are used.
> 
> Platform is ARM64 based A72.  Can somebody reproduce the results or
> know what may have changed to make such a dramatic change?
> 
> FIO command and resulting log output below using null_blk to remove
> as many hardware specific driver dependencies as possible.
> 
> modprobe null_blk queue_mode=2 irqmode=0 completion_nsec=0
> submit_queues=1 bs=4096
> 
> taskset 0x1 fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --numjobs=1
> --gtod_reduce=1 --name=readtest --filename=/dev/nullb0 --bs=4k
> --iodepth=128 --time_based --runtime=15 --readwrite=read

I can confirm that I also see a ~20% drop in results from 4.10 to 4.11 on
my AMD Seattle board w/ defconfig, but I can't see anything obvious in the
log.

Things you could try:

  1. Try disabling CONFIG_NUMA in the 4.11 kernel (this was enabled in
     defconfig between the releases).

  2. Try to reproduce on an x86 box

  3. Have a go at bisecting the issue, so we can revert the offender if
     necessary.

Cheers,

Will

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-05-08 11:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-06  1:37 FIO performance regression in 4.11 kernel vs. 4.10 kernel observed on ARM64 Scott Branden
2017-05-06  1:37 ` Scott Branden
2017-05-06  1:54 ` Scott Branden
2017-05-06  1:54   ` Scott Branden
2017-05-08 11:07 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-05-08 11:07   ` Will Deacon
2017-05-08 11:19   ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-05-08 11:19     ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-05-08 14:08     ` Jens Axboe
2017-05-08 14:08       ` Jens Axboe
2017-05-08 15:24       ` Will Deacon
2017-05-08 15:24         ` Will Deacon
2017-05-08 15:28         ` Jens Axboe
2017-05-08 15:28           ` Jens Axboe
2017-05-08 17:38           ` Scott Branden
2017-05-08 17:38             ` Scott Branden
2017-05-15 20:10           ` Scott Branden
2017-05-15 20:10             ` Scott Branden
2017-05-08 16:32         ` Scott Branden
2017-05-08 16:32           ` Scott Branden

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170508110754.GI8526@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.